Barriers and Facilitators for Type-2 Diabetes Management in South Asians: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although South Asian populations have among the highest burden of type 2 diabetes in the world, their diabetes management remains poor. We systematically reviewed studies on South Asian patient's perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to diabetes management. METHODS: We conducted a literature search using OVID, CINHAL and EMBASE (January, 1990 -February, 2014) evaluating the core components of diabetes management: interactions with health care providers, diet, exercise, and medication adherence. South Asian patients were self-reported as Indian, Pakistani, Malaysian-Indian or Bangladeshi origin. From 208 abstracts reviewed, 20 studies were included (19 qualitative including mixed methods studies, 1 questionnaire). Barriers and facilitators were extracted and combined using qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: All studies included barriers and few facilitators were identified. Language and communication discordance with the healthcare provider was a significant barrier to receiving and understanding diabetes education. There was inconsistent willingness to partake in self-management with preference for following their physician's guidance. Barriers to adopting a diabetic diet were lack of specific details on South Asian tailored diabetic diet; social responsibilities to continue with a traditional diet, and misconceptions on the components of the diabetic diet. For exercise, South Asian patients were concerned with lack of gender specific exercise facilities and fear of injury or worsening health with exercise. Patients reported a lack of understanding about diabetes medication management, preference for folk and phytotherapy, and concerns about the long-term safety of diabetes medications. Facilitators included trust in care providers, use of culturally appropriate exercise and dietary advice and increasing family involvement. Overall themes for the barriers included lack of knowledge and misperceptions as well as lack of cultural adaptation to diabetes management. CONCLUSION: Diabetes programs that focus on improving communication, addressing prevailing misconceptions, and culture specific strategies may be useful for improving diabetes management for South Asians.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".